Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-06-24-Speech-2-008"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080624.3.2-008"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Thank you very much, Mr President, for giving me the floor. And thank you also for your words of praise for the Slovenian Presidency. I greatly appreciate the good cooperation during our Presidency of the European Council, and cooperation with Parliament. To you, Mr Barroso, President of the Commission, as regards cooperation with the European Commission I can say that it was very good, and the synergy between the Council, Commission and Parliament in the last six months has helped us to achieve several advances which have made Europe better and more effective, in particular regarding the necessary responses to global challenges.
When we fail to explain this – and this is both a problem of national politics and of European politics – the subconscious reaction of the individual – and it is logical, and normal – is to defend what exists. Clinging to the belief that what we have has been brought us by the existing solutions and why should we therefore change them. It is significantly easier in these circumstances to depict fears than depict future results which we do not yet have.
The challenge here is great and the discussion at the June European Council has clearly shown that it must be accepted. It also showed that we are united in recognising that an enlarged European Union needs, on the one hand, instruments for more effective and more democratic functioning inwardly, and on the other hand, of course, it needs a new institutional base for more effective functioning outwardly. There is simply no alternative here. We can look for various options, yet there is simply no alternative to this strategic response.
We have also agreed that on the basis of a joint approach, joint analysis, and on the basis of the proposals from our Irish colleagues at the October European Council, we will set out the path ahead. But until then we should follow three guidelines, namely: to look for a solution in a way that will not rock the foundations of the Lisbon Treaty, on which we agreed and which we signed jointly on 13 December last year and which gives good responses to the key challenges facing the European Union. Therefore, the agreement is that we go on building from here and not start from the beginning.
Equally, there is the agreement and conclusion that ratification processes will continue. Democracy means that the opinion of all is respected, that the opinion of all has equal weight, that the decision of voters in Ireland is respected as expressed in the referendum, but that the opinion of the remainder is also respected, of course. To date the Treaty has been ratified by 19 national parliaments. The UK parliament completed ratification right at the time of the referendum in Ireland and the session of the European Council. In a word, at this same time one of the Member States was continuing with the ratification process and was keeping up and maintaining the tempo.
In spite of that, as I have already said, the signal from Ireland needs to be taken seriously. If for no other reason than that this is not the first time there has been a negative response to the proposed changes or to a reform treaty. And also because this is not the final treaty we are harmonising or which will need amending. This is not the last amendment the European Union will be proposing. Future years and decades will also demand responses to new challenges that arise. Such and even more important solutions than these will have to be continuously coordinated. Therefore, account needs to be taken and due consideration given to this right now.
Firstly, why has this happened? We must establish all the reasons and, in my view, concentrate hard on what I was talking about earlier – about the age-old challenge to all politics. At the same time I believe we have to focus on communication, which should or must clearly show Europeans, why Europe needs a new treaty. I believe this can be explained to people, that it is not so difficult, but that we need a certain time for this, along with the right approach.
I believe we also have to build on the fact that a certain general attitude to the institutions of the European Union is changing. If you want me to be more precise I believe we have to put more into building a European identity. A European identity that does not impinge on the national identities of Member States. A sort of synergy of these identities. Here I do not see the way out in some kind of confrontation of the different identities, but in a synergy. I believe it is very important in this approach for us to know that this identity is only built relatively slowly, through formal acts and formal institutions, and that we also need a more gentle approach.
On this point there was a very good debate with European civil society, if I can put it that way, on the 60
anniversary of the Hague Congress, where a range of good proposals was put forward. The President of the Parliament participated in this debate, as did the President of the Commission and the heads of numerous other European institutions, and hundreds of young people, as well as representatives of older generations from all over the European Union. Several proposals were repeated there which we will, in my view, have to start implementing in the future.
Despite the fact that in the European Union we have a large number of official languages which have equal status – and that to a certain extent is the problem, when it involves shaping the European media or for instance the European film industry – that should not be an obstacle to adopting approaches or taking such steps, and not doing those things that are easier. In terms of identity it is very important for people to identify with something that is common – with a European Union football team, say. One could arrange a football match between the European Union and Latin America or the African Union. There have been some experiments like that in the past. They attracted much more attention from the European public than the meeting itself. And from this we should learn a lesson.
Consequently, we have to adapt communication. (
) That match would certainly be well attended. Perhaps better than this sitting. (
)
I am pleased to have the opportunity today, ladies and gentlemen, to present the conclusions of the June European Council. It was an interesting meeting full of challenges, and in a way also an opportunity to summarise the progress we have made together in the last six months. In the first half of 2008, events have followed one upon the other, thick and fast. The shifts that we have made prove that Europe is dynamic, that it is functioning, and that it is capable of addressing problems.
Regarding this communication I think we have to realise that modern technologies are shaping a kind of new approach by the young generations in communication, that this is opening up numerous new opportunities and is making it possible for us to overcome numerous barriers that could not be overcome in the past. At the same time, of course, it does mean that we have a very exacting population. These are people who are aware of their rights, and are also aware of the possibility of exercising these rights, and communication must take account of that.
In short, I am convinced that the pace in seeking the solutions contained in the Lisbon Reform Treaty will not be lost between now and October. The majority of my colleagues from those Member States of the European Union where the procedure for ratifying the Lisbon Reform Treaty has not been completed have told the Council in this debate that this will happen in the coming months. The figures will look quite different by October.
The European Council has not changed the agenda despite the fact that we have encountered this deadlock in ratification because of the referendum in Ireland. The agenda concentrated on issues of security, the rises in the price of oil and energy products and the social consequences of this and, of course, on environmental and energy issues.
We have mapped out a certain way of dealing with the rising prices of food and oil – I believe the Commission President will say more on this – yet the Council has established that the problem is serious. While food prices in 2006 rose by 9%, they soared last year by 40%, and in the first three months of this year they reached their highest nominal values in the last 50 years. And oil prices have risen in six years by 500 percentage points, which has changed the situation strategically.
That is why in the Council we spoke a great deal of short-term measures, especially of those that are urgently needed for individuals and households on low incomes, where a large proportion of personal or family budgets is spent on food. Here of course we need to know which of these measures fall to European policies and which fall to national policies or the governments of Member States. Many of these measures are being adopted by individual countries. The European Commission has also adopted a range of measures which are in its competence. And these measures are necessary; short-term measures are necessary. To talk just about long-term measures is certainly a mistake, because up until the long-term measures start to work, people need to live. And in this interim period we will have to assist those who are most affected. This is also expected from national governments and from the European Union. We need to know, however, which reaction is more effective and at what level.
Of course we have the European Union primarily because in the framework of this Community, in the European Union, we can find answers to the questions which individual states cannot resolve. When we talk of the real reasons for the rising prices of oil, food, raw materials and energy in general, these are strategic global problems. If there is ever a highly pronounced need for some joint European action, then it is here, in this situation.
The real structural or strategic reasons for these price hikes are, of course, a disconnect between supply and demand. Demand has grown significantly recently. In the short term, and in the medium term, we may attempt to bridge this gap, primarily through increased output, openness, a market orientation of the agricultural and energy sectors, and of course through innovations which produce short-term results, as well as measures such as the systematic monitoring of the price growth.
But we should not delude ourselves. The times of cheap food and especially cheap energy are past. They will not come back. Changes in habits as well as new technological solutions are the key here. And in order to reach this – alongside environmental reasons, which we talked about a great deal in March – we now also see very specific economic, and to a great extent social, reasons. There is no time to focus on this further.
Let me say about the other conclusions. We have also agreed measures that will increase the security of Europeans. The success of the European Union will depend increasingly on turning outwards, and therefore it is important that citizens feel that openness does not compromise their security, but increases it. Provided, of course, that we put in place the right mechanisms.
The European Council has therefore confirmed the recent achievements in the field of justice and home affairs, the conclusion of the Schengen enlargement and the agreement to move over to a new second generation IT system by September 2009. It has confirmed the transformation of Europol into a European Union agency, progress in the implementation of an anti-terrorist strategy, and a framework decision strengthening the rights of citizens in the enforcement of decisions in absentia.
In the last six months – if I can list just a few achievements – we have expanded the eurozone, in the last week inviting Slovakia, which will join the eurozone on 1 January 2009, we have removed the final Schengen barriers, and we have opened and implemented a sizeable part of the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue. Here special thanks are due to the President of the Parliament, Hans-Gert Pöttering for the range of events organised in the European Parliament during the Year of Intercultural Dialogue. I was present myself at several of these events. In particular the meeting with religious leaders represented, in my opinion, much added value and the continuation of a tradition which is worth preserving into the future.
We have also taken some steps towards a good basis for the adoption of the energy and climate package by the end of the year. And on the same point – I can say this is my own experience after these last six months – where we are talking about the energy and climate package and about climate change, the eyes of practically the whole world are on the European Union. Solutions are expected from us. Leadership, too. And here we carry a very great responsibility.
When the President of the Commission and I met several heads of Caribbean states at the EU-Latin America and Caribbean summit, they begged us to make the European Union stand firm. We should take forward these measures, for they said that they were facing very directly what the consequences would be, in so far as climate change will not stop. We also heard very sad stories about how sizeable areas, island areas of some of these countries, are already disappearing.
At its June meeting the European Council summarised the many steps forward we have made. There is no time to list everything now. We are pleased with the Galileo Agreement. We are pleased with agreement on several directives which required a long time to be harmonised. We are pleased that a breakthrough has been made in liberalising the energy market, as regards both gas and electricity. And we are pleased, too, that these solutions were reached, as I said earlier, either with or on the basis of the good cooperation of the Council, the European Parliament, the political groups, the chairmen of the working parties in the European Parliament, and that communications were realistic and that we were able to make these steps forward.
We are also pleased with the breakthroughs achieved in terms of the European perspective for the Western Balkans. This period has seen the signing of association and stabilisation agreements with all those countries. And in terms of the situation in Kosovo, the European Union has performed a strategic and stabilising role. We are pleased that we have harmonised practical measures and that despite the anxieties that existed in January, when we were talking of these priorities and when I was replying to your questions on the situation in this region, we can say today that the situation overall in the region is substantially more stable, and substantially more stable than many anticipated, including in Kosovo.
Therefore, once again a sincere thank you for your cooperation which has brought synergy. A great many of the advances we have made, and also some of those which we have only half finished and which await the next Presidency, could only have been done because we put a great deal of common goodwill into these efforts, to the benefit of Europe.
We established the Euro-Mediterranean University on the Slovenian coast and reached agreement on the headquarters for the European Institute for Innovation and Technology in Budapest. The first European Maritime Day has been established. In March we started up the second cycle of the renewed Lisbon Strategy and introduced a fifth freedom.
We have also celebrated some important anniversaries for the European Union: the 10
anniversary of the European Central Bank and of the euro, the 50
anniversary of this esteemed House, the European Parliament, and the 60
anniversary of the Hague Congress.
As I already said earlier it was possible to move forward thanks primarily to the good cooperation and synergy we achieved between the Council, Parliament and Commission. My thanks again to both Presidents for the distinct personal commitment they have shown. Without this, coordination would have been substantially more difficult and these advances more uncertain. It was strategic help, in a word. Thank you for that – and thanks also go to the chairmen of the political groups, to the leaders of the committees in the European Parliament for good communications, for their cooperation, especially in these last few weeks after the referendum in Ireland which were politically very demanding. I may say – of course this is my assessment – that for our part we regard this cooperation as very good.
I would like to start today’s substantive report on the June European Council where I finished my speech in January when I was setting out the priorities, namely with the desire that at some time any random passer-by in any city in the European Union, including Ireland, could say without hesitation, he feels European and he cares what happens to Europe tomorrow because he knows that Europe cares what will happen to him tomorrow.
I myself believe that the latest events and the vote against ratification of the Lisbon Reform Treaty in Ireland, have given this idea a certain added weight. We have to realise that this is not a crisis for the Lisbon Treaty or a crisis for Europe or the European Union in general. I think it is a case of the age-old challenge for all politics, since politics has been in existence, since politics has been a working for the common good.
The challenge is specifically this: how can we ensure majority support for reform proposals and proposals for change at a time when things are going well. And at times when no great external dangers are visible. At a time when we can all see that life for the present generations in Europe is considerably better than that of the previous generations? How are we to persuade people that in order for this good or stable life to continue some changes have to be introduced? And how are we to ensure support for these proposed changes at times when the sun is shining, when the weather is nice or fairly nice? And how do we explain that it really is necessary to fix the roof in good time?"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Speech interrupted by a Member – laughter"1
"th"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples